Two WD07 comments

["Barnhill, William [USA]" <barnhill_william@bah.com>]

Overall it looks very good, but I have two things that I think should change:

The first is that I think the example in Appendix B is too minimal. I feel there should be at least one example that makes varied use of the <type> and <link> elements. Perhaps an example of an XRD corresponding to an i-name that links to that individual's services (with another example XRD for one of the services).  I think by having a more robust example we will increase the understanding of people who are reading the spec from outside the TC and can better demonstrate XRD's usefulness above current alternatives.

The second is the acknowledgements section. Why have two portions? I can think of no good or valid reason to separate the contributors into what could be interpreted as first-class contributors and second-class contributors. I'd suggest re-wording to get rid of the second block and integrate those names into the first block, all in alphabetical order, before taking this to committee draft. If we need to denote who is not a current member of the XRI TC, then put a * next to their name with a footnote explaining that starred individuals are not currently voting members of the XRI TC. 

I will be on the call tomorrow. Drummond/Peter, can I get the above two items added to the agenda for tomorrow's call?

-- Bill